Working to cope with climate change

[Trakar]

...BTW: Why do you think a Wiki link to "hockey stick" would change my mind? I posted the UK Telegraph journalistic story of the fraud that includes the hockey stick -- did they lie or misrepresent anything or didn't you read it or do you think that Wiki is the ultimate scientific referee? Which is it -- enfant terrible?

They lied and misrepresented virtually every statement in the article. Not surprising, however, expecting journalism from the Telegraph is about as silly as expecting accuracy in its American twin publication, the Weekly World News

NOW -- your objectivity falls to shreds... I've SEEN the data from every tree in that Siberian forest. I witnessed their obviously fraudulent selection of the ones that fit their objectives. I've also seen studies trying to confirm ANY accuracy in that tree ring data from Siberia and it isn't there. (Briffa was FORCED to release the raw data set after ClimateGate) There is no defense of the indefensible. Yet you try..

You have either been misled or in your politically oriented certainty are simply mistaken, but the above is inaccurate and fallacious. When you relax and can manage to type without constantly slipping into what appear to be emotion driven rhetorical caps, I will be happy to discuss and do my best to explain any science that you are having problems properly understanding.

 

[Trakar]

Sounds to me like your copping to the fact that your livelihood DEPENDS on the assumption of man-made climate change. That's an important disclosure dontcha think? I'm not poking you about it -- but perhaps it does make a diff to some of us who ARE actually pretty economically and politically neutral (but SERIOUS) about the topic... Carry-on...

I have seen nothing politically neutral about your interests in this topic, in fact, your beliefs and understandings seem entirely and fringely partisan in nature and character. I do invest to protect the future of my family and while many of my investments do reflect my understandings of the world and business in particular, none of my investments depend upon the realities and demonstrable fact that human CO2 emissions are the primary forcing agent of modern climate change.

Not talking about your investments.. I'm talking about your ".... professional life revolve around the .. issues of climate change"..

Currently, my professional life predominantly revolves around managing my investments (working on my fourth retirement, hoping this one takes) - though I have been dabbling in teaching and have had a few offers from universities here in the NW, I just don't think I have the tolerance to deal with the arrogantly ignorant as a required daily routine.

 

[Trakar]

Doubt over man-made climate change is mainstream. A steadily increasing number too...

Even if we stick to popular polls this statement is inaccurate:

In U.S., Global Warming Views Steady Despite Warm Winter

 

[Trakar]

You do realize that these are libelous lies and malicious fairytale distortions from top to bottom, don't you?

Filthy heretics, speaking words that impugn the church.

Are you planning violence against them?

Exactly how would acting irrationally alieviate or correct the inappropriate and improper behavior of another?

 

[westwall]

Climategate reveals 'the most influential tree in the world' - Telegraph

You do realize that these are libelous lies and malicious fairytale distortions from top to bottom, don't you?

If that is so why the hell did they try so hard to prevent the release of the information? Seems to me they are the ones trying to hide something and that is criminally actionable.
It will be interesting to see what sort of legal trouble they will be in if it is shown that they have been commiting academic fraud on the taxpayers dime. I can see a whole host of criminal charges being levelled in that case.

I am really delighted that mann sued Dr. Ball. we are going to get A LOT of info that will be very useable in those cases when they finally get filed. mann et al will be doing some seriously hard time.

How's your buddy Gleick doing? Any word on criminal charges yet?

 

[westwall]

You do realize that these are libelous lies and malicious fairytale distortions from top to bottom, don't you?

Filthy heretics, speaking words that impugn the church.

Are you planning violence against them?

Exactly how would acting irrationally alieviate or correct the inappropriate and improper behavior of another?

Good question, I see many cases where the AGW crowd in an endeavor to halt discussion of their poor scientific methodology are resorting to attempts to classify scepticism as mental disease and other methods that are renowned in totalitarian states to control the populace.

Yep, you're in with a real wonderful group there. How many times have you guys made threats against sceptics? Oh let me count the times.

 

[Trakar]

Filthy heretics, speaking words that impugn the church.

Are you planning violence against them?

Exactly how would acting irrationally alieviate or correct the inappropriate and improper behavior of another?

Good question, I see many cases where the AGW crowd in an endeavor to halt discussion of their poor scientific methodology are resorting to attempts to classify scepticism as mental disease and other methods that are renowned in totalitarian states to control the populace.

Most all science researchers are, by definition, Skeptics. The pseudoscience denialism displayed by the vast majority of those who have tried to politicize the science and subvert it to political ambitions, are not skeptics.

 

[Old Rocks]

Ah Walleyes, you really work so hard to earn the title, dumb fuck.

No, there will be no criminal charges against any of our scientists. Just the very foolish ideologues that cannot acknowledge physical reality when it clashes with their ideology calling names, and demonstrating their foolishness.

 

[flacaltenn]

Ah Walleyes, you really work so hard to earn the title, dumb fuck.

No, there will be no criminal charges against any of our scientists. Just the very foolish ideologues that cannot acknowledge physical reality when it clashes with their ideology calling names, and demonstrating their foolishness.

Now I've heard it all.. "OUR SCIENTISTS"? What -- you have season tickets to the CRU lecture series or something?

 

[flacaltenn]

They lied and misrepresented virtually every statement in the article. Not surprising, however, expecting journalism from the Telegraph is about as silly as expecting accuracy in its American twin publication, the Weekly World News

NOW -- your objectivity falls to shreds... I've SEEN the data from every tree in that Siberian forest. I witnessed their obviously fraudulent selection of the ones that fit their objectives. I've also seen studies trying to confirm ANY accuracy in that tree ring data from Siberia and it isn't there. (Briffa was FORCED to release the raw data set after ClimateGate) There is no defense of the indefensible. Yet you try..

You have either been misled or in your politically oriented certainty are simply mistaken, but the above is inaccurate and fallacious. When you relax and can manage to type without constantly slipping into what appear to be emotion driven rhetorical caps, I will be happy to discuss and do my best to explain any science that you are having problems properly understanding.

Real dissapointing Trakar. I thought you had the juice what with all that bluster about AOGCMs and all. Have you ever SEEN the graphs for the trees from that Siberian study? Wouldn't it be easy to discuss why it's IMPOSSIBLE that any fraud was committed?

It's obvious that you're bluffing because my politics have NOTHING, NADA to do with my informed views. In fact, you'll rarely find me in any of partisian feces throwing on this board. And when you DO -- there's nothing Demo or RePub about my views. Maybe important to you -- irrelevent to the HORRENDOUS act of scientific deception that has occured in this field. We're done -- unless in your words --- you can tell me why those desert nighttime studies aren't germane and how the Telegraph got TreeGate all totally wrong..

 

[Trakar]

...It's obvious that you're bluffing because my politics have NOTHING, NADA to do with my informed views. In fact, you'll rarely find me in any of partisian feces throwing on this board. And when you DO -- there's nothing Demo or RePub about my views. Maybe important to you -- irrelevent to the HORRENDOUS act of scientific deception that has occured in this field. We're done -- unless in your words --- you can tell me why those desert nighttime studies aren't germane and how the Telegraph got TreeGate all totally wrong..

"Bluffing" about what?

You claim no political views and yet almost every reference you've provided so far, has come from far fringe conservative and libertarian political advocacy sites, your arguments repeat (repleat with derogatory political framing and epithets), near verbatim, the terms these political advocates make.

The only "desert nighttime study" you've offered so far is a meandering opinion discussion piece more than anything resembling an actual research study and the Telegraph piece is like most Telegraph pieces libelous claptrap design to pump sensationalism to their target fringe and sell ad space.

I'm more than willing and able to discuss any aspect of the science that you seriously wish to discuss, likewise if you want to talk about public policy related to climate change, I'm more than willing to share and discuss my considerations. None of the rest really interests me, one way or the other.

 

[bobgnote]

Swear to Buddha, Trakar and O.R., you guys must not have actually met fucktards before, or you'd take every opportunity to cuss these fucks, but I can understand, some people just don't pick up that style.

Wienerbitch went down, today. He posted an earlier version of the Pacific NW oyster die-off, with the now-discarded speculation bacteria or whatever were involved; he didn't realize he was posting a carbonic acid-related event, right under where Crosstard Fuckbitch was ranting at me about how carbonic acid goes carbonate, so it won't kill, and Wiener tried to lay on the 'fuck-yous,' etc. Maybe he doesn't know whose sock he wants to be. Why don't you help the dummy out, Wallybitch? You can teach your little idiot socks, to wait ten lines, post shit, insult, tard-rant, neo-con cheer, rah-rah, fart.

 

[flacaltenn]

<Trakar>

The only "desert nighttime study" you've offered so far is a meandering opinion discussion piece more than anything resembling an actual research study and the Telegraph piece is like most Telegraph pieces libelous claptrap design to pump sensationalism to their target fringe and sell ad space.

It's obvious that you don't do science. Those desert nightime are brilliant work. You didn't read it or couldn't hack the trivial math or don't know the diff between science and what you call "an opinion piece".

Let me just clue you in.. I've got over 25 years in advanced research and development. (not in this field tho) I've given invited papers at some of the most prestigous shindigs in my fields. I know how science works. And you're bluffing.

 

[bobgnote]

Let me just clue you in.. I've got over 25 years in advanced research and development. (not in this field tho) I've given invited papers at some of the most prestigous shindigs in my fields. I know how science works. And you're bluffing.

Who in the world would pay you, for 25 minutes? Go back over your shit, at this forum!

1. Tree theory of hockey stick, never mind methane, particularly Arctic methane-triggered runaway global warming;
2. Complete horseshit about your bogus light-theories, as you try to fudge a way, to make the rising amount of low-level water-vapor and whatever, into a tinfoil hat, for the planet, but you've been huffing worse than ozone;
3. Lots and lots of fellowship, with fucktard wingpunks, who you should be socking, but one of them (Wienerbitch) tried to post an earlier, flawed version of the Pacific NW oyster die-off story, with an incorrect theory, about a bacterial infection, but it was carbonic acid, in upwelling cold water, which killed the oyster larvae.

You keep refusing to go over, to the AMEG site, which O.R. posted, you cannot read Wikipedia or any other source, which explains the 'hockey stick' graph, and so you are like a gay bulldog, hanging on and humping the tree-theory, of warming upswing graphic source media. The methane releases will cause the departure, from steady rise, due to CO2 proliferation.

Why don't you just admit you are in love with Quantum Windbag, and you and Queen of the seas can go drink sodas, at the beach, fuck each other, and see who's the talk, and who's the sock? You and Q-bitch need to sort each other out, and then get back here.

Haha, just kidding. Nobody needs you guys, but you might like each other. Maybe you do, already. Look at the shit you write, about how some fools maybe paid you, instead of let you hang out. Disgusting. If you can't fool me, why are you shoving at Trakar?

Didn't you read why he is in no hurry, to teach, again? Assholes like you are everywhere! Some of 'em are even stupider and more brazen at bullshit, than you are, and you are mighty gay and steppin'.

 

[bobgnote]

Guess the smiley. Which of these will work? Here's some science for you and your wingpunks, Fats:

:doink: :ugly: :fart: eace: :bitch: :imho: :cop: :burnout: :ace:

 

[westwall]

Exactly how would acting irrationally alieviate or correct the inappropriate and improper behavior of another?

Good question, I see many cases where the AGW crowd in an endeavor to halt discussion of their poor scientific methodology are resorting to attempts to classify scepticism as mental disease and other methods that are renowned in totalitarian states to control the populace.

Most all science researchers are, by definition, Skeptics. The pseudoscience denialism displayed by the vast majority of those who have tried to politicize the science and subvert it to political ambitions, are not skeptics.

The only group to have politicized it is the AGW crowd. When the evidence started going against them they have resorted to pal review and blocking any papers that didn't adhere to the "approved" theory. That's not science, that's dogma, and dogma is religion baby.

 

[westwall]

Ah Walleyes, you really work so hard to earn the title, dumb fuck.

No, there will be no criminal charges against any of our scientists. Just the very foolish ideologues that cannot acknowledge physical reality when it clashes with their ideology calling names, and demonstrating their foolishness.

You mean like your side that tries to block any scientific paper that doesn't tow the line? You mean like Hansen falsifying the historic data sets to make his theories work?
You mean like Gleick stealing someones identity to steal private information and then forging a document in an endeavor to sully their image? And you clowns defend that sort of unethical behavior?

And you expect us to care a bit about what you fools have to say? Really? That's not science. That's religious dogma of the worst kind.

 

[jack113]

Doubt over climate change is personal opinion based on corporate propaganda on non scientific observations to support corporate destruction of our environment to make bigger profits off their brainwashed followers.

Hacked emails is theft not science punishable by imprisonment and when the British finish their investigation into this criminal activity the criminals will be locked up.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Most all science researchers are, by definition, Skeptics.

Then by definition, AGW is NOT science.

The pseudoscience denialism displayed by the vast majority of those who have tried to politicize the science and subvert it to political ambitions, are not skeptics.

You mean the pseudoscience of global warming.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Doubt over climate change is personal opinion based on corporate propaganda on non scientific observations to support corporate destruction of our environment to make bigger profits off their brainwashed followers.

Hacked emails is theft not science punishable by imprisonment and when the British finish their investigation into this criminal activity the criminals will be locked up.

Oh, well then all of the fraud revealed by the emails will be striken from the public record...

ROFL

You cultists are a hoot.